Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
process?
historiography
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
Delhi School of Economics
&dquo;What, then, were the new elements of political chemistry out of which
Akbar compounded such a large, stable, long-lasting politicf!! structure?
At the risk of oversimplification, I would say that these were an
extreme systematization of administration, a new theoretical basis for
.sovereignty, and a balanced and stable composition of the ruling class&dquo;.
M. Athar Ali, &dquo;Towards an interpretation of the Mughal Empire&dquo;,
-
p. 40.
Introduction
Much has been written in the past three decades about the Mughal state,
which dominates the study of medieval Indian history, even though its
career extends in one fashion or the other as late as the middle of the
nineteenth century. The first volume of The Cambridge Economic History
of India (1982) is largely devoted to the Mughals; the New Cambridge
History of India, a set of volumes still in progress, has an entire section
(Section I) devoted to The Mughals and their Contemporaries, includingironically enough-a volume on the Vijayanagara state, which was founded
some two hundred years before Babur set foot in Hindustan.
Cf.
Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib, eds., The Cambridge Economic History of
Cambridge, 1982; the volume on the general history of the Mughals in the New
Cambridge History of India is to be by J.F. Richards (provisional title: The Mughal Empire
),
Acknowledgements: The author acknowledges with gratitude the help of Muzaffar Alam and
Nalini Delvoye, and comments hy Ramachandra Guha. All views expressed here are
India, Vol. I,
292
The greater part of these writings have, almost inevitably, been produced in south Asia, and at least some of them have the sort of coherence
that one would attribute to a school. In contrast, with the exception of
John F. Richardss Mughal Administration in Golconda. 1687-1724
(Oxford 1975), the 1960s and 1970s saw no major work on the economic
and political history of Mughal India produced in Europe or North
America. Indeed, at the level of monographic literature, scholars based in
these continents have remained remarkably wary of venturing any generalisations on the high Mughal period-preferring instead to view the
Mughals from the safe vantage-point of the late eighteenth or nineteenth
centuries, and very largely on the basis of the documentation provided by
the English East India Company. Writings such as those of Andrd Wink,
sometimes misrepresented as making a basic contribution to Mughal studies
through the use of master concepts (in the instance, fitna), in fact are
essentially treatments of regional states in the eighteenth century, based
almost exclusively on materials pertaining to this period.
This is in marked contrast to the situation in respect of cultural history,
where much interesting work continues to emerge, on subjects like Mughal
architecture and painting, from the western universities. However, these
writings remain imperfectly integrated into the larger political, social and
and has not yet appeared. For a fuller examination of the historiography, and an attempt at
reformulating the problems of Mughal state-building, see Muzaffar Alam and Sanjay
Subrahmanyam, State-building in South Asia and the Mughals, 1500-1750, in Tosun Aricanli,
Ashraf Ghani and David Ludden, eds., The Political Economy of the Ottoman, Safavid and
Mughal Empires, New York, forthcoming.
2
André Wink, Land and sovereignty in India: Agrarian society and politics under the
eighteenth-century Maratha Svarajya, Cambridge, 1986; for views of this book as a basic
reformulation on the Mughals in even the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, see Robert
E. Frykenberg, Indias Past seen "From Below" , Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth
History, Vol. XVII, (3), 1989, pp. 433-37; also David Washbrook, South Asia, The World
System, and World Capitalism, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XLIX, (3), 1990,
pp. 479-508, especially p. 491.
Finally, see Peter Hardy, The authority of Muslim kings in mediaeval South Asia, in
Marc Gaborieau, ed., Islam et société en Asie du Sud, Collection Purusārtha No. 9, Paris,
1986, pp. 37-55. Hardy concludes his discussion in the 1750s. and writes, acknowledging
a great debt to Winks work: At that point, when all conflict, all politics had been
submerged in the stable stillness of a motionless immensity of all-embracing but impotent
universal overlordship, Mughal authority had become most truly Indian (p. 51). In brief
then, Winks theories have their greatest appeal to those who believe in the motionless
immensity of the basic motors of state formation in pre-colonial India!
3
For contributions to the study of Mughal architecture, Wayne E. Begley and Z.A. Desai,
Taj Mahal: The illumined tomb, Cambridge, Mass. , 1989;Wayne E. Begley, The myth of the
Taj Mahal and a new theory of its symbolic meaning, The Art Bulletin, No. 61, March 1979,
pp. 7-37; Ebba Koch, Shahjahan and Orpheus, Graz, 1988. More recently, there is a useful
summing up of recent developments in this field by Ebba Koch, Mughal Architecture: An
outline of its history and development, Munich, 1991. On art-history, see Milo C. Beach, The
Grand Mogul: Imperial Painting in India. 1600-1660, Williamstown, Mass., 1978; Stuart Cary
Welch, Imperial Mughal Painting, London, 1978; Milo C. Beach, The Imperial image: Paintings
for the Mughal court, Washington, 1981; Annemarie Schimmel and Stuart Cary Welch,
293
begin though by sketching very broadly the received wisdom and the
current state of the historiography on the Mughals. It is often stated that
modem studies of the Mughals are dominated by the Aligarh school, a
statement that might itself be open to controversy. Is there an Aligarh
school in medieval Indian history? If so, what are the main propositions it
has put forward? A consideration of Medieval ndia-A Miscellany, an
occasional publication from the Centre for Advanced Study, Department
of History, Aligarh Muslim University, may leave the reader in doubt.
The Miscellany is precisely that, an eclectic collection of points of view; if
us
Anvaris Divan: A pocket book for Akbar, New York, 1983; Michael Brand and Glenn
D. Lowry, Akbars India: Art from the Mughal City of Victory, New York, 1985. For a rare
to use art-history for the furtherance of political history, see Som Prakash Verma,
Elements of historicity in the portraits of the Mughal school, The Indian Historical Review,
Vol. IX, (1/2), 1982-83, pp. 63-73. Milo C. Beach will author a volume on Mughal art-history
for the New Cambridge History of India, with the counterpart volume for architecture being
by Catherine Asher.
4
Douglas E. Streusand, The Formation of the Mughal Empire, Delhi, 1989; Stephen
P. Blake, Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India 1639-1739, Cambridge, 1991.
5
Medieval India—A Miscellany, 4 Volumes, Bombay, 1969-1977; Volumes V and VI are
forthcoming. For an early reference to the Aligarh school see Peter Hardy, Commentary
and Critique, in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXXV, (2), 1976, pp. 257-63. The use
has now gained some currency; thus see C. Srinivasa Reddy, Approaches to the Mughal
state, Social Scientist, Vol. XIX, (10/11). 1991, pp. 90-96. Perhaps more representative of
the Aligarh school than Medieval India—A Miscellany is a set of three volumes in Hindi,
attempt
294
thing
material, although
1)
On
under
challenge during
the
reign
of
Aurangzeb.
We note that
Madhyakālīn Bhārat, ed., Irfan Habib, New Delhi, Rajkamal Publications, 1981-1990. These
volumes contain selected translations from English of articles and book-reviews, both from
the Miscellany and other sources; they exclude the writings of K.A. Nizami, but include those
of Ashin Das Gupta (whose views on trade and its role in an understanding of the Mughal
state, coincide closely with those of the Aligarh school).
6
Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics at the Mughal court, 1707-1740, Aligarh, 1959;
compare this with Chandra, The Eighteenth Century in India: Its Economy and the Role of the
Marathas, the Jats, the Sikhs and the Afghans, Calcutta, 1986. For a sample of the other main
writings, see Irfan Habib, Potentialities of capitalistic development in the economy of
Mughal India, The Journal of Economic History, Volume XXIX, (1), 1969; M. Athar Ali,
The Mughal nobility under Aurangzeb, Bombay, 1966; and Noman Ahmad Siddiqi, Land
Revenue Administration under the Mughals, 1700-1750, Bombay, 1970.
295
both the
sistence.&dquo;K
5)
resources
7
For the characteristic neglect
the periods of Babur and Humayun, see Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib, eds.,
Cambridge Economic History of India, Vol. I, passim;
M. Athar Ali, Towards an interpretation of the Mughal empire, Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1978, No. 1, pp. 38-49. In contrast see Mohibbul Hasan,
Babur: Founder of the Mughal Empire in India, New Delhi, 1985, pp. 32-78; and some
examples among the earlier writings of Iqtidar Alam Khan, such as his Mirza Kamran, a
biographical study, Bombay, 1964.
Tapan Raychaudhuri, The State and the Economy: The Mughal empire, in Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, Volume I, p. 173.
9
Irfan Habib, The Technology and Economy of Mughal India, The Indian Economic and
Social History Review, Vol. XVII, (1), 1980, pp. 1-34; M. Athar Ali, The Passing of Empire:
The Mughal case, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. IX, (3), 1975, pp. 385-96.
10
Cf. Shireen Moosvi, The economy of the Mughal empire c. 1595: A statistical study,
Delhi, 1987. It is evidently no coincidence that this monograph, which rests heavily on the
Āin-i Akbarī, never discusses who Abul Fazl was, or for what ends the text was written.
Significantly, most reviewers of the book have also passed over the issue in silence.
of
The
296
Mughal
state
Cf. Shireen Moosvi, The silver influx, money supply, prices and revenue-extraction in
India, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. XXX, (1),
1987, pp. 47-94; also Moosvi, The economy of the Mughal empire, pp. 390-91.
12
Raychaudhuri, The State and the Economy. pp. .178, 192-93. Also his The mideighteenth century background, in Dharma Kumar. ed., The Cambridge Economic History
of India, Vol. II. Cambridge, 1983.
"
Habib, Agrarian System, pp. 317-51. especially p. 351. Also see, more recently, Zahir
Uddin Malik, Core and Periphery: A contribution to the debate on eighteenth century
India, Sociål Scientist, Vol. XVIII, (11/12), 1990.
Mughal
/297
example, following
sophisticated despotism. 15
14
Iqtidar Husain Siddiqui. Some Aspects of Afghan Despotism in India, Aligarh, 1969;
Mohibbul Hasan, Babur, pp. 158-60. A particularly significant, and neglected, period, is of
the rule of Sikandar Shah Lodi (1489-1517). which seems to have had significant continuities
with the reforms carried out under Sher Shah Sur (1538-45).
"
Iqtidar Alam Khan, The Turko-Mongol Theory of Kingship, in Medieval India: A
Miscellany, Vol. II, Bombay, 1972. pp. 8-18; the argument is presented in a weaker form in
I.A. Khan. The political biography of a Mughal noble Munim Khan Khan-i Khanan,
298/
299
rebellions. On both occasions, Akbar had to move against him, but although
defeated, he was never set aside. Implicitly, then, Mirza Hakims hereditary right to rule over Kabul was not challenged, and he appears to have
had a relatively free hand in organising revenue-assignments in the region,
as well as in conducting negotiations with the Abulkhairi Uzbek state of
Mavarannahr, with the Safavids (who treated him as a sovereign ruler) and
with another Timurid potentate, Mirza Sulaiman. The latter, also a neglected figure of the same epoch, was the ruler of Badakhshan, as well as
Mirza Hakims father-in-law; he eventually lost his territories to the
Uzbeks and become a mansabdar with the rank of 5,000 under Akbar,
dying in Lahore in 1589.11
Now, even though Akbars chroniclers (and especially Abul Fazl) go to
some lengths to portray Mirza Hakim as an unruly subordinate of Akbar, it
is evident that his position was more complex. First, we may note that he is
never treated, even retrospectively, as a Mughal amir; his biography is thus
absent from Shahnawaz Khans Maasir ul-Umard, unlike that of Mirza
Sulaiman.&dquo; There is also no clear evidence that he ever held a manvab; on
the contrary, several prominent manvabdars are described as men who had
come over to Akbars service after his half-brothers death. In more senses
than one, therefore, Mirza Hakim represented an alternative powercentre, and an alternative focus of authority and patronage to Akbar; and
even if the challenge from him did not wholly mature, we cannot dismiss it
out of hand. The very fact that Abul Fazl himself reports a discussion in
Akbars court in the early 1580s. of a proposal to assassinate Mirza Hakim,
and thus end the threat from him once and for all, is highly suggestive.&dquo; It
is therefore rather surprising that while devoting some attention to the
abortive challenge posed to Akbar by the other Mirzas (Timurid descendants, and thus distant cousins of Akbar, usually of Badakhshani origin,
discussed on pp. 102-6), Streusand wholly ignores the significance of
Mirza Hakims challenge. In particular, given his claims to posing Mughal
history in a wider context, it would have been of interest to examine more
closely the perception of Akbar in western and central Asia vis-a-vis his
brother, through an examination of such texts as the celebrated Uzbek
chronicle of Tanish al-Bukhari, Abdullah Nma (or Sharaf Ninw-yi Shhl),
as well as the diplomatic correspondence with the Safavids.1
18
Cf. The Akbar Nama of Abu-l-Fazl, trans. H. Beveridge, 3 Vols., reprint Delhi, 1989,
III, pp. 211-22, 836-37.
19
Nawwab Samsam-ud-daula Shah Nawaz Khan (and Abdul Hayy), The Maathir-ulUmara, trans. and ed. H. Beveridge and Baini Prashad, Vol. II, Calcutta, 1952. pp. 884-93.
Akbar Nama, trans. Beveridge, Vol. III, p. 523.
20
21
For instance, in at least one letter of the period 1576-77, the Safavid ruler Shah Ismail II
addresses Mirza Hakim as pādshāh- and masnad nishin
; for a summary of this text (from
manuscript versions inter alia in British Museum. Addn. 7654. fols. 186a-187b, and
Addn. 7688. fol. 128a). see Riazul Islam. ed., A calendar of documents on Indo—Persian
relations (1500-1700), 2 Vols. Karachi/Teheran. 1978-82, Vol. I, letter A. 20, p. 100. Also
Vol.
300
We
significant
301
a postulate that Akbars institutions were created sui generis, we might
speak of an evolving tool-box of contemporary statecraft, from which a set
of institutions were improvised and partly innovated. This would enable
us, to start
rulers
with,
to
place
explanation on the
genius.
This, however, is
accepted
as a
not
postulate
bureaucratic traditions, it follows that they could not have had anything to do with the
of the mansab
! In this context, see Shireen Moosvi, Evolution of the Mansab
under Akbar until 1596-97, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and
Ireland, 1981. No. 2, pp. 178-85. Moosvi examines briefly the relationship between the
mansab and the earlier usage marātib, as found under Humayun (citing Khwandamirs
Qānun-i Humāyunī, ed., M. Hidayat Hosain, Calcutta, 1940), but concludes that the latter is
not a precursor of the former. Now, of course, the term mansab was not a Mughal invention;
only it acquired a particular connotation with them. Again, since the term marātib continues
to occur in later documents, it would be interesting to investigate whether in fact its sense
there does not overlap with that of mansab.
24
Cf. Marshall G.S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, 3 Vols., Chicago, 1974, Vol. III (The
Gunpowder Empires and Modern Times). For a reconsideration, I. Metin Kunt, The later
Muslim Empires: Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals, in Marjorie Kelly, ed., Islam: The religious
and political life of a world community, New York, 1984, pp. 112-36. Also Geoffrey Parker,
The military revolution: Military innovation and the rise of the west, 1500-1800, Cambridge,
1987. On gunpowder empires in southern India, see Burton Stein, State formation and
economy reconsidered, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. XIX, (3), 1985, and for a critique,
Sanjay Subrahmanyam, The Kagemusha Effect: The Portuguese, firearms and the state in
early modern South India, Moyen Orient et Océan Indien, No. 4, 1987.
origins
System
302
question.
On the issue of the reforms of the 1570s and the Akbari constitution,
Streusand concludes that the official ideology under Akbar did include
significant Hindu elements in it, and that this was because the Mughal
state was hybrid-Islamic at the centre, but Hindu at the periphery: thus,
an Ottoman Sultan would have found the central bureaucracy familiar; a
Chola Rajah would have understood the limited imperial role in the
provinces. The conclusion therefore is that the Mughal government [w]as
an imperial centre supported by a shifting structure of segments (p. 181).
It is only natural, in view of this, that towards his concluding paragraphs,
as well as earlier in his book, Streusand pays obeisance to Burton Steins
segmentary state formulation, arguing that it may not be wholly inappropriate in the Mughal context (albeit with some modifications). 25 In
effect, the substance of his conclusion appears to be that despite having
undergone a process of centralisation, the Mughal state as a structure
remained, at the time of Akbars death, less centralised than say the
Ottoman state. This was, he argues, largely the result of the fact that in the.
years following the great revolt of 1580-82 in the eastern part of the
realm, Akbar compromised the principles of centralized government
which he and his closest advisers shared (p. 178). The result, in his view,
was the resort to the jagir system, and Streusand maintains that the failure
of centralising forces is clearly manifested in the execution in 1581 of
Khwaja Shah Mansur Shirazi, who had been appointed wazir in 1578, on
false accusations of rebellion (and loyalty to Mirza Hakim!) (pp. 166-70).
If we compare his monograph to the Aligarh paradigm outlined above,
25
Society
303
Mughal power and the extractive nature of the post-Akbar state do not
come through as clearly in his work as in those other writings. Further, an
attempt is made to bring in ideological elements, as well as court-ritual, in
what is clearly the result of the influence of Chicago-based anthropological history (we may note here that the book, like that of Blake is based
on a Ph.D. dissertation from the University of Chicago). Again, the zabt
system, which Athar Ali has described as the characteristic institution of
Mughal revenue administration, gets little space in his analysis, as indeed
do matters economic in general. 26 The economic significance of the incorporation of Gujarat, Bengal and Sind into the Mughal domains between
1570 and 1595, for example, is scarcely touched upon, and the focus
remains very much on imperial court and centre. This disregard for the
relationship between central state and region, and indeed for spatial
analysis in general, also characterises Blakes formulation, discussed at
greater length below.
Ideology,
Kingship is a gift of God, and is not bestowed till many thousand grand
requisiies have been gathered together in an individual. Race and
wealth and the assembling of a mob are not enough for this great
position. It is clear to the wise that a few among the holy qualities (sifut-i
qudsi) are, magnanimity, lofty benevolence, wide capacity, abundant
exuberance, exalted understanding, innate graciousness, natural courage
26
an
and Moosvi,
304
the same could not be said of Mirza Hakim, who was hence
destined to fall into the whirlpool of destruction! Now this idea, together
with the theory of divine effulgence (farr-i izidy to the ruler, and of a
notion of kingship whose raison dtre stems from a sort of social contract,
make up the key elements of Abul Fazls formulation. It is certainly true
that aspects of this formulation were adopted later by Jahangir, by
Shahjahan (who referred to himself as the shadow of God, siya-yi khud,
in dealings with the Deccan Sultanates), and subsequently even used in the
latter half of the seventeenth century by the opponents of the Mughals
(such as the Marathas) to question the legitimacy of particular rulers.
Again, this type of formulation finds mention even in the early eighteenth
century, in the context of dealings between the Mughals and their Hindu
subjects over sensitive matters of religious practice. On the other hand, it is
also often forgotten that the Ain-i Akbari was produced rather late in
Akbars half-century long reign. In the earlier decades, other ideological
avenues had been explored. The unfinished and anonymously authored
chronicle, Tdr[kh-i Khdnddn-i Timuriyya, begun in the 1580s, sought for
example to stress precisely the Timurid aspects of Akbars patrimony,
inexplicable if the ruler had been trying to divest himself of this TurkoMongol baggage.&dquo; This chronicle later attracted the attention of Akbars
grandson Shah j ahan, who-incidentally -was keen for his part to reassert
his Timurid patrimony in the context of territorial expansion in the direction of Central Asia.
More important even perhaps than the chronicle mentioned above for a
proper understanding of the evolution of ideology under Akbar is the
Tari_kh-i Alfi, which finds but brief mention in Streusands work, possibly
because it remains in manuscript form.29 This chronicle was initially conceived of, in 1581-82, as a joint project of several authors under state
supervision, but was eventually written up largely by two chroniclers:
Mulla Ahmad Thattawi and Asaf Khan Jafar Beg. As summarised by
S.A.A. Rizvi, the Trkh-i Alfi was meant by Akbar to commemmorate
the millenium of the Islamic calendar (in 1591-9L), and began not with the
Presumably
27
Akbar Nama, trans. Beveridge, Vol. II, p. 421. The context of this passage is the rebellion
of 1567. For an earlier comment on the role of this passage in Abul Fazls formulation, see Ibn
Hasan, The central structure of the Mughal empire, reprint, New Delhi, 1980, pp. 59-61.
28
For the Tār
-i Kh
īkh
āndān-i Timuriyya see Maulavi Abdul Muqtadir, Catalogue of the
Arabic and Pérsian Manuscripts in the Khuda Bakhsh Oriental Public Library, Vol. VII
(Indian History), reprint, Patna, 1977, pp..40-48; for some illustrations from this text, see
Mughal Art of Miniature Painting at its climax, Patna (Khuda Bakhsh Library), 1984.
29
Streusand, Formation, p. 133; for an earlier brief mention, see Harbans Mukhia,
305
Timur
(thus, it was unlike the Tfrikh-I Khndn-i Timuriyya), but with the
rihlat (death of the Prophet Muhammad). Brought up to the reign of
Akbar, but eventually abandoned in favour of the Akbar Nama as the
official chronicle of the reign, the Tarikh-i Alfi presents us with something
of a puzzle. If it is indeed, as is sometimes claimed, a purely rational work
of history, it is difficult to understand why the miracles attributed to Akbar
find a place in it, in the sections written by Asaf Khan. From internal
evidence, it appears rather to have been a work aimed at posing Akbar
within the framework of Islam, as the Bddshah-i Islam, as superior to other
famed heroes of the Islamic tradition like Saladin, as a monarch disposed
to resolving difficulties between Shias and Sunnis, as well making sure that
kafirs are shouldering the burdens of Islam . -0 This is a somewhat different
image of Akbar than the secular and radically-minded monarch who
syncretised Islam and Hinduism; this Akbar is a preserver of tradition, who
seeks to remove unauthorised innovations and new regulations in religious
practice, and at whose command wolves perform the task of shepherds.
Such an image may have been meant to be divulged not within India
alone, but even to Akbars competitors, the rulers of the Safavid and
Ottoman states, and the Uzbek state of Mavarannahr. Of these the Uzbek
factor is a crucial one, and therefore surprisingly neglected in the literature.
We are aware that the Uzbek ruler Abdullah Khan proceeded in stages to
consolidate his power, over a period roughly conterminous with Akbars
own reign. Between 1551 and 1556, he was challenged by, but eventually
bested, his rival Nawruz Ahmad Khan. Then, in 1557, he captured Bukhara
and made it his capital, going on between 1573 and 1583 to take Balkh,
Samarqand, Tashkent and Farghana. It was only in 1583, however, that he
formally assumed the title of Khan, in place of his father, Iskandar.
Between the late 1570s and the late 1590s, Abdullah Khan appeared to be
a dangerous foe, a relatively orthodox Sunni monarch, who ran an increasingly tight fiscal system. Thus, once Abdullah Khan had emerged
dominant over rival clans, the Mughals had to treat with him; and it should
be recalled that in the early 1580s, Akbar maintained a correspondence
with the Uzbek ruler, which was intended partly to counter the latters
territorial ambitions and dealings with Akbars half-brother, Mirza Hakim,
who formed a sort of buffer between Akbars domains and those of
Mavarannahr. The dealings with Abdullah Khan also had another
during the reign of Akbar, New Delhi, 1972, pp. 107-8. For
manuscript, see D.N. Marshall, Mughals in India: A bibliographical survey of manuscripts, reprint, London, 1987, pp. 50-51, entry No. 166. Translated
excerpts appear in H.M Elliot and J. Dowson, eds., The History of India as told by its own
historians (The Muhammadan Period
), 8 Vols., London, 1867-77. reprint Allahabad, n.d.,
Historians and historiography
references to versions of the
in Akbars
Reign,
New
306/
Alfī.
"
307
adoption
34
Cf. Jean Aubin, Révolution chiite et conservatisme: Les soufis de Lāhejān, 1500-1514.
Moyen Orient et Océan Indien, No. 1, 1984, pp. 1-40; Aubin, Lavènement des Safavides
reconsidéré, Moyen Orient et Océan Indien, No. 5, 1988, pp. 1-130; for a later period,
Masashi Haneda, Le Chāh et les Qizilbāš: Le système militaire safavide. Berlin, 1987. On the
Mughal case, compare J.F. Richards, The Formulation of Imperial Authority under Akbar
and Jahangir, in Richards, ed., Kingship and Authority in South Asia, Madison, 1978,
pp. 252-89. Another interesting avenue to explore is the parallel between Akbars practice
at this juncture, and that of another of his ideological opponents, Bayazid Ansari. leader of
the Raushaniyya movement.
35
For an earlier version of the argument, see Stephen P. Blake, The patrimonialbureaucratic empire of the Mughals, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXXIX, (1), 1979,
pp. 77-94. For earlier attempts to combine Weberian theory with a return to personalityoriented history, see M.N. Pearson, Political participation in Mughal India, The Indian
Economic and Social History Review, Vol. IX, (2), 1972, pp. 113-31, especially p. 131, and
Pearson, Shivaji and the decline of the Mughal empire, The Journal of Asian Studies,
Vol. XXXV, (2), 1976, pp. 221-35. More recently, Hardy. The authority of Muslim Kings.
308
and since the city was the kingdom in miniature, it seems to follow
that it encompassed everything in the kingdom as well. This model, if read
literally, appears to be the Ahgarh model of centralisation taken to its very
extreme. Reconciling it with the segmentary state hence presents us with
more or less insurmountable conceptual difficulties. Streusand suggests a
vague soiution: a patrimonial-bureaucratic central structure, petering out
into an increasingly weak hold over the countryside. But the two models
are so diametrically opposed that the very idea of a weighted average
between the two seems untenable.
It is of course true that evidence in favour of viewing the Mughal state as
segmentary can be found. Let us consider a specific set of sources, namely
the travel accounts of contemporary Europeans. Several of these writers,
like the Dutch merchant Francisco Pelsaert (1595-1630), and the French
physician Francois Bernier (1620-1688), can hardly be used to buttress
the view of the Mughal empire as centralised at its height (viz. the
seventeenth century); in fact Bernier, in the quotation cited at the outset of
this article, stresses the limited nature of Mughal power, as does Pelsaert in
his Remonstrantie written somewhat earlier.&dquo; However, while ignoring or
suppressing this particular facet of Berniers writings, modern historians
like Athar Ali and Irfan Habib are not in the least reluctant to accept a
good part of his other observations on such issues as jag[rdarf and its
implications, the billion inflow into India, the roots of crisis in Aurangzebs
reign, and so on.&dquo;
The key text that is used is Berniers letter to Louis XIVs minister JeanBaptiste Colbert (1619-1683), written in the late 1660s.~ This letter concerns four issues, (a) the extent of Hindoustan, (b) the currencies in use,
and the absorption of gold and silver there, (c) resources, armies, and
the administration of justice, and (d) the principal Cause of the Decline
of the States of Asia. In the latter half of this letter, we find the first
articulation of the theory of the agrarian crisis which stems from the
inherently unstable nature of ji2girdiri; this view was first taken on board,
among modern writers, by W.H. Moreland, and then subsequently by the
historians we have mentioned above.-&dquo; it has, however, been pointed out
city,
36
D.H.A. Kolff and H.W. van Santen, eds., De Geschriften van Francisco Pelsaert over
1627: Kroniek en Remonstrantie, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1979; François
Bernier, Travels in the Mogul Empire, AD 1656-1668, trans. A. Constable, ed., V.A. Smith,
reprint New Delhi, 1989.
37
See for example Irfan Habib, Agrarian relations and land revenue: North India, in
Raychaudhuri and Habib, eds., Cambridge Economic History, Vol. I. p. 243; Shireen
Moosvi, Scarcities, prices and exploitation: The agrarian crisis, 1658-1670, Studies in History,
(n.s.), Vol.I (1), 1986; earlier, Habib, The Agrarian System, pp. 320-21.
38
Bernier, Letter to Monseigneur Colbert concerning the Extent of Hindoustan,
pp. 200-238.
39
W.H. Moreland. From Akbar to Aurangzeb: A study in Indian economic history,
London, 1923, pp. 304-5, passim. Also Moreland, The Agrarian System of Moslem India:
A Historical Essay with Appendices, London, 1929, pp. 146-48.
Mughal Indie,
309
on more
40
Perry Anderson, Lineages of the Absolutist State, London, 1974, pp. 399-400. 473-74;
Sylvia Murr, La Politique "au Mogol" selon Bernier: Appareil conceptuel, rhétorique stratégique, philosophie morale. in J. Pouchepadass and H. Stern. eds., De la Royauté à lÉtat
dans le monde indien, Collection Purusārtha No. 13. Paris, 1991. pp. 239-311. For Chardin,
see Journal du Voyage du Chevalier Chardin en Perse et aux Indes Orientales, 3 Vols.,
Amsterdam, 1711;
Kroell, Douze lettres de Jean Chardin, Journal Asiatique, 270,
Nos. 3-4, 1982.
41
Burton Stein, The segmentary state: Interim reflections, in J. Pouchepadass and
H. Stern, eds., De la Royauté à lEtat, pp. 217-38.
Anne
310
omnipresent
state
Whether one agrees with his conception of the Mughal state or not, much
remains that is potentially of interest in Blakes Shahjahanabad. After a
brief opening chapter on Delhis other cities, and his patrimonial-bureaucratic theory of state, Blakes book passes on to the longest of the seven
chapters, one entitled Cityscape. This is followed by others, entitled
Society, Economy, Courtly and Popular Culture, Aftermath of
Imperium, and Comparison and Conclusion. The first four of these
chapters promise to provide insights into a Mughal city of a type that does
not exist in the literature; oniy a handful of articies and the odd monograph
42
Chetan
Singh,
Centre and
Periphery
in the
Mughal
State: The
century Panjab, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. XXII, (2), 1988; also
case
see
311
deal with the urban history of the epoch. The centrepiece of the exercise is
naturally a detailed map, which is to be found on pages 72-73, and which
depicts Shahjahanabad in 1739. To ones surprise, however, one discovers
that this map is in fact based on a mid-nineteenth century Survey of India
outline, with details filled in from earlier evidence. Thirty-seven individual
structures are identified within the city, and described rapidly (pp. 75--82),
sometimes in one or two lines. A sense of change and chronology remains
absent: modifications in the city between 1639 and 1739--the rise of new
quarters and the fall of others, the shifting relationship between Shahjahanabad and its suburbs (such as Jaipura, or the Shia settlement, even
today called Karbala, where Safdar Jang chose to be buried in the eighteenth century) are never plainly set out, even if the suburbs are described
(pp. 57--66).
Nevertheless, the Cityscape chapter is an important one, more carefully
done than one can encounter in the normal writings of historians of Mughal
India. No comparable study of Aurangabad or Lahore exists, though
Fatehpur Sikri and even Agra are relatively well-served.44 It revisits a
theme that Blake had already touched on in his paper in Delhi through the
Ages, edited by R.E. Frykenberg, and also sets the stage for the chapters
that follow, in the sense of providing the spatial context for social, economic
and cultural interactions among the residents of the city. 45 As in his earlier
essay, Blake seeks to argue that the plan of Shahjahanabad reflects both
Hindu and Islamic influences (p. 32). This seems quite likely, but the
authors belief that the architects of Shahjahanabad had access to specific
Sanskrit treatises like the Manasdra (from the fifth to seventh century) is
the purest speculation. Indeed, both Blake and Streusand have somewhat
ahistorical views on what constitutes Hindu thinking on statecraft and
kingship in the period, and are for the most part content to assume that an
immutable classical model (such as that set out by Ronald Inden), holds
good for all time~ven if no reference to it can be found in the texts of the
Mughal period. Equally, the references to how Shahjahanabads structure
44
On
Agra,
see
I.P.
Gupta,
Urban
the
Imperial Capital
(16th and 17th Centuries), Delhi, 1986, which for some reason does not appear in Blakes
bibliography; on Fatehpur Sikri, see inter alia, Michael Brand and Glenn D. Lowry, eds.,
Fatehpur Sikri, Bombay, 1987. On Lahore, we have the useful but rather brief discussion in
Chetan Singh, Region and Empire, pp. 177-84.
45
S.P. Blake, Cityscape of an imperial capital: Shahjahanabad in 1739, in R.E. Frykenberg,
ed., Delhi through the ages: Essays in urban history, culture and society, Delhi, 1986,
pp. 152-91.
46
Cf. Ronald Inden, Ritual Authority and Cyclic Time in Hindu Kingship, in J.F. Richards.
ed., Kingship and Authority, pp. 28-73. For a more historical approach to the issue of
kingship in one set of Hindu states, see Velcheru Narayana Rao, David Shulman and Sanjay
Subrahmanyam, Symbols of Substance: Court and State in Nayaka-period Tamil Nadu, Delhi,
1992. Indens own position on such matters as historicity seems to have changed somewhat in
his more recent writings, cf. his discussion of the Rashtrakutas in Inden, Imagining India,
Oxford, 1990.
312
313
1740s.&dquo; Now, the greater part of this text is simply not about popular
as generally understood. Khyal and Dhrupad singers, acting
which
troupes
performed for the imperial household, and musicians who
on
the
bin and other instruments of art-music, did so very often
performed
within the aegis of elite patronage, and Dargah Quli Khan was obviously
himself one such elite patron. However, Blake is clearly unfamiliar with
the traditions within which such activities can be located, which is further
confounded by numerous misreadings of the manuscript.&dquo; On occasion,
Dargah Ouli Khan does enter into what can truly be called the popular
culture of eighteenth-century Delhi; but to group art-music, as well as the
poetry of Mirza Bedil and Mirza Mazhar Jan-i Janan under the head of
popular culture suggests either that Blake is providing a radical redefinition of the spheres of elite and popular, or that from his perspective the
popular can be subsumed under the elite. Or, to put the matter somewhat
differently, not even the popular culture of Delhi can escape the clutches
of the state in this treatment; the state is not merely omnipotent but
culture,
omnipresent.
The last substantive chapter, Aftermath of Imperium, follows inevitably
from this logic. It is argued that after Nadir Shahs attack on the city in
1739, there followed a dismal and dispiriting time, lasting till 1803,
leading in turn to a period of peace and healing (p. 161) which continued
to 1857. Since it has already been argued in earlier chapters by Blake that
the city is no more than a mirror of the State, it naturally follows that the
first period-when the Mughal state entered into decline-would have led
47
been
Footnotes 105
to
175 of the
chapter
refer
solely
to this text
to
the
manuscript
and Shama Mitra Chenoy, Muraqqa-e-Dehli: The Mughal Capital in Muhammad Shahs
Time, Delhi, 1989, which however has a rather awkward flavour and some inaccuracies. Had
Blake consulted these editions, certain obvious errors could have been avoided, on which
more in note 48 below. This is not the only instance in which Blake cites manuscript versions
of Persian texts, while ignoring critical editions that collate several manuscripts. Other
examples include Mirza Sangin Beg, Sair ul-Manāzil, ed., S.H. Qasimi, New Delhi, 1982;
Bakhtawar Khan, Mirāt ul-Ālam, ed., Sajida Alavi, Lahore. 1979; Muhammad Hadi
Kamwar Khan. Tazkirat us-Salātīn Chag
tā, ed., Muzaffar Alam, Bombay, 1980.
h
48
A few examples will suffice here. In the text, there are curious explications such as that
sic is a kind of song, and that qawwāl (sic!) is a special kind of singing (p. 157). As
(
iyāl )
kh
for misreadings, these are legion: the singer Rahimsen appears as Jimsen; a dancer Kali
Ganga appears asKaki Kanka; at one point, the description of two singers Jani and Ghulam
Rasul is conflated with that of one Baqir Tamburchi (which appears next in the text); and a
certain Hasan Khan Rebabi is found to be an orthodox Muslim, when Dargah Quli Khan
says no more than that God should pity him in his poverty!
314
missing
merchant
One of the reasons why the state must carry such a burden in Blakes
formulation is because of his belief in the extremely weak position of other
sections in urban society, in particular merchants. Since cities in the period
were usually major centres of exchange (with production probably being
less important, relatively speaking), one expects to find in any urban
history a detailed discussion of merchant activity, the more so since sources
on the issue are far from absent. Thus, ideally, one would have expected to
see Shahjahanabad as a centre, linked to smaller provincial towns in the
suba of Delhi,
to other
...
It was not until the English East India Company began to extend its
control over the subcontinent in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries and introduced the principles of private property, sanctity of
contract, and rule of law that a true market economy hospitable to
merchants began to develop (p. 112).
Of course, not all cliches are false. However, in the instance at hand,
Blakes views are of some importance for his larger constructs, for justifying his cavalier treatment of merchant communities in the city, and for
his view of the exchange economy as no more than an appendage of the
households of the ruler and amirs (pp. 116-20). It underpins blanket
assertions, such as that the merchants who staffed these markets, many of
whom were Khattris, should be seen as clients, members of elite househo!ds,
and not as independent businessmen (p. 117)-for which Blake cites no
reference in contemporary evidence. In the final analysis, this view of
315
merchant
316
seventeenth century
as
Wider horizons
The writings of both Streusand and Blake are characterised by a common
feature: the explicit desire to pose the Mughals in a wider context. This is a
laudable objective, though obviously these wider horizons could have been
as much within south Asia as outside of it. For example, given the recent
rash of publications on the city of Vijayanagara in south India, it might
have been an interesting exercise to compare it to Shahjahanabad.11 Again,
in the case of Streusands analysis, it might have been of some utility to
analyse ideas on kingship deriving from elsewhere in south Asia in the
sixteenth century, rather than resting content with references to the classical
Hindu model. To take the example of Vijayanagara once again, during the
period of Krishnadevaraya (r. 1509-29), an enormous literature was produced at the court, including some attributed to the ruler himself. Since
many elements of the popular image of Akbar in north India, including the
dealings between him and Birbal, and the idea of the navaratna, bear a
close resemblance to myths about Krishnadevarayas court, this comparison remains an avenue with some potential. 53
50
Cf. Mukund Lath, ed. and trans. Ardhakathānaka: Half a Tale, Jaipur, 1981. For the
example of the use of this text, see Tapan Raychaudhuri, The commercial
entrepreneur in pre-colonial India: Aspirations and expectations. A note, in Roderich Ptak
and Dietmar Rothermund, eds., Emporia, Commodities and Entrepreneurs in Asian Maritime
Trade, c. 1400-1750, Stuttgart, 1991, especially pp. 342-45.
51
James C. Boyajian, Portuguese Bankers in the Court of Spain, 1626-1650, New Brunswick,
1983. Here, I would agree with the views expressed on the question by Irfan Habib,
Merchant communities in pre-colonial India, in James Tracy, ed., The rise of merchant
empires: Long-distance trade in the early modern world 1350-1750, New York, 1990,
pp. 371-99.
52
On Vijayanagara as an urban centre, see for example J,M. Fritz and G. Michell, Interpreting the plan of a medieval Hindu capital: Vijayanagara, World Archaeology, Vol. XIX,
(1), 1987, pp. 105-29; Vasundhara Filliozat, Les quartiers et marchés de Hampi, Bulletin
de lÉcole Française dExtrême Orient, Vol. LXIV, 1977, pp. 39-42.
For surveys of the literature of this period, see V. Narayana Rao, Afterword, in
H. Heifetz and V. Narayana Rao, trans. and ed., For the Lord of the Animals—Poems from
the Telugu: The Kālahastīśvara Śatakamu of Dhurjati, Delhi, 1987, pp. 131-66; also David
most recent
"
317
Blake in the concluding chapter of his book does not look so far south,
but he looks both east and west. The cities with which he chooses to
compare Shahjahanabad are, within Mughal India itself, Agra, to the west
Istanbul and Isfahan, and to the east Edo and Peking. The comparison
occupies less than thirty pages, and follows a set pattern. In each case, the
general features of the states-the Ottoman Empire, Safavid Iran, Tokugawa
Japan, and Ming and Ching China-are set out, followed by a description of
the city, and then an assertion of the general applicability of the patrimonialbureaucratic model, and its concomitant, the idea of the sovereign city.
It would be tedious to discuss each of these comparisons once more in
detail here, and so I shall confine myself to one cas~-that of the Ottomans.
A curious feature of Blakes comparative exercise is the quite limited
literature he cites on Istanbul and the Ottoman empire. The description of
Istanbul rests largely on the works of Bernard Lewis and the entry for
Istanbul by Halil Inalcik in the Encyclopaedia of Islam; a particular omission
is Robert Mantrans general study of daily life in the city in the sixteenth
century Mantrans careful attempt, even in this semi-popular work, to
balance Istanbul as an administrative city and seat of the Empire, against
its other features-as a mercantile, religious and manufacturing centrecould well have served as a model for how to write a history of Shahjahanabad that talks of issues other than the court and the amirs. Admittedly
the sources for Ottoman urban history are far richer than those available
for the Mughals, but the issue here is of conception as much as the
deployment of evidence. For, Blakes view of both the Ottoman state and
Istanbul is reductionist in character, again neglects chronology and development for structure, and hence fails for example to locate in proper
perspective the relationship between Ottoman expansion into Iraq, the
Red Sea littoral, north Africa and eastern Europe, and the character of the
state itself and of its capital.
A major problem with the comparison is that the relationship between
Istanbul and other urban centres in the Ottoman domains remains in the
shadow. Unlike Shahjahanabad, Istanbul was far and away the largest
urban centre in the region, with other centres in Anatolia being quite small
in comparison. This was not so with Shahjahanabad, for Agra-even after
the court had shifted from it-continued to be comparable to it in order of
magnitude. Further, Istanbul-as the former capital of the Byzantine
empire-~njoyed a far greater and more continuous historically accumulated prestige than Delhi, again on account of the rivalry with Agra.
D. Shulman, The King and the Clown in South Indian Myth and Poetry, Princeton, 1985,
pp. 180-200.
54
Cf. Mantran. La vie quotidienne à Istanbul au siècle de Soliman le Magnifique, second
edition, Paris, 1990; first edition. 1965, under the title La vie quotidienneà Constantinople au
).
temps de Soliman le Magnifique et de ses sucesseurs (XVIe et XVIIe siècles
318
Finally. and crucially (as Mantran reminds us), Istanbul was a maritime
city, and had a particularly remarkable port, on which it depended for the
greater part of the economic life of the capital.5 Thus, Istanbul was far
more than a sovereign-city (ddr al-saltanat), only one of the many epithets
applied to it. Indeed, this point can as well be made of Shahjahanabad as
well. 56
Ottoman and, to a lesser extent, Safavid historiography undoubtedly has
a great deal to offer the student of the Mughals. Urban history is certainly
one of the fields in which Ottomanists are far in advance of their counterparts who study the Mughals. Besides Istanbul, excellent monographic
studies exist of Cairo (by Andre Raymond and others), Jerusalem, Aleppo,
Bursa, Izmir, Ankara, Kayseri (the last two by Suraiya Faroqhi) and a
number of other towns. 57 Yet, what all of these studies stress is the vivacity
and complexity of urban life, which extends far beyond a mere discussion
of the participation of the ruler and nobility therein. Even the study of
building construction under state patronage has afforded to Ottomanists a
view of the participation of social groups other than the elite in the process,
just as the analysis of the Janissary revolts has ramifications extending far
beyond the state. There is clearly a lesson to be learnt here.
If one of the major gains to be had from opening up comparisons
between the Mughals and Ottomans is methodological, it is not merely
restricted to urban history. Cornell Fleischers study of Mustafa Ali
(1541-1600), an Ottoman chronicler, administrator and ideologue, presents
us with a model of sophisticated analysis, combining psychological insights,
with social history and the history of thought on statecraft, It far surpassess any analysis that one can find on such figures in the Mughal case,
where the biographies of even such fascinating figures as Abdur-Rahim
Khan-i Khanan, the celebrated general, administrator, poet and patron of
55
Mantran, La vie quotidienne, 2nd edition, p. 51; for Istanbuls dominance over the
Anatolian urban network, see Leila T. Erder and Suraiya Faroqhi, The development of the
Anatolian urban network during the sixteenth century, Journal of the Economic and Social
History of the Orient, Vol. XXIII, (3), 1980, pp. 265-303.
56
Marc Gaborieau, Villes de toile et villes de pierre: Les capitales mogholes etaient-elles
des camps?, paper presented to the Congress on Villes Asiatiques, Meudon, December 1989.
Also see S. Nurul Hasan, The Morphology of a Medieval Indian City: A case-study of
Shahjahanabad in the 18th and early 19th century, Urban History Association of India,
Amritsar, 1982.
57
Cf. Suraiya Faroqhi, Towns and townsmen in Ottoman Anatolia: Trade, crafts and food
production in an urban setting, 1520-1650, Cambridge. 1984; Faroqhi, Men of modest substance : Houseowners and House Property in Seventeenth-Century Ankara and Kayseri,
Cambridge, 1987; André Raymond, Artisans et commerçants au Caire au XVIII siècle, 2
Volumes. Damascus, 1973-74; Raymond, The great Arab cities in the 16th-18th centuries: An
Introduction, New York, 1984.
58
Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual. Of course, even within the context of the Ottoman
historiography. Fleischers work must be recognised as unusual, rather than representative.
319
the arts, are in the final analysis worthy but somewhat dull exercises. 59
Much the same can be said of other figures such as Abul Fazl and his
brother, Abul Faiz Faizi, on both of whom a wealth of material--including
their letter-collections (insha)--exists. If indeed one wished to
the
issues addressed by Streusand in his book, namely statecraft, ideological
currents, and factional politics in Akbars reign, a thorough exploitation of
these materials would be in order.
At the same time, an analysis of the ideology of the Mughal court and
attempts to seek legitimacy cannot be achieved solely through recourse to
Persian chronicles and correspondence. We may also seek to examine
other images of the ruler produced and propagated by the court, be it in
Sanskrit or in the vernacular literature ef the epoch. Obviously, these may
have been destined in part for a different audience than tha-t which read the
Akbar Nfma or the Tinkh-I Alfi, but they are none the less significant for
that. Among the important vernacular works, we may count the writings in
Brajbhasha of Keshavdas (b. 1555) from Orcha, who in around 1612 wrote
the lahangr-yas-candrik in honour of the Mughal ruler, in which-among
other things-he praises Jahangir as master of both faiths (duhurii dn kau
sahib). It is significant in this particular case, that while Jahangir receives
fulsome praise, the personage of Akbar is given short shrift, reflecting the
political pressures of the moment on the poet (whose main patron, Bir
Singh Deo of Orcha, had been responsible for the assassination of Abul
Fazl)60! Thus, what is evidently in order is a far closer coordination between the fields of literary, social and political history, of the sort that
Fleischer is able to accomplish in the Ottoman case.
reopen
Summing up
To conclude then, it may be premature to state that fresh winds have begun
to blow from the west through the Mughal historiography. Indeed, the
59
ān-i Kh
ānān and his literary circle, Ahmedabad,
Compare C.R. Naik, Abdur Rahım Kh
1966, and Annemarie Schimmel, A Dervish in the Guise of a Prince: Khān-i Khānān Abdur
Rahim as a Patron, in Barbara Stoler Miller, ed., The Powers of Art: Patronage in Indian
Culture, Delhi, 1992, pp. 202-23. Far more disappointing is Fauzia Zareen Abbas, Abdul
Qadir Badauni-as a man and historiographer, Delhi, 1987.
60
See, for example, Ronald Stuart McGregor, Hindi Literature from Its Beginnings to the
Nineteenth Century (A History of Indian Literature, ed., Jan Gonda, Vol. VIII, Fasc. 6),
Wiesbaden, 1984, pp. 119-29, especially pp. 128-29. McGregors discussion of the period
of Akbar rests in good measure on Saryu Prasad Agraval, Akbari darbār ke hindi kavi,
Allahabad, 1950. On a particular form of praise-verse and its exponents like Tansen, see
Françoise Delvoye Nalini, Les chants dhrupad en langue braj des poètes-musiciens de
lInde moghole, in Françoise Mallison, ed., Litteratures médievales de lInde du nord:
Contributions de Charlotte Vaudeville et de ses élèves. Paris, 1991, pp. 139-85. On Sanskrit
literature
at
the
Mughal
court,
1981.
see
Jatindra Bimal
Chaudhry,
Muslim
Patronage
to
Sanskrit
320
principal conclusion of the present essay has been that the works that have
been considered here often echo, even in exaggerated ways, the orthodoxies
of the past three decades and more, on the history of the Mughal state. The
major problem, it would seem, is the excessive preoccupation with identifying an essential structure; this runs parallel to existing tendencies to speak
constantly of the systems in operation under the Mughals, such as the
agrarian system, the imperial monetary system, the mansab system, the
jagir system, and so on.61 This preoccupation has in turn led to a seeming
conflict that has been fought out in the arena of models, where the
patrimonial-bureaucratic has jousted with the segmentary, and the
uniquely (perhaps semi-feudal?) Mughal model. I have attempted to
argue that the acceptance or rejection of these (usually pre-fabricated)
models does little to enhance our understanding of the Mughal state and its
history. Ihis is, I believe, not a reason for despair, but rather one for hope.
It opens the way to an alternative approach to the Mughal period, one that
is
regions,
61
Cf. an earlier critique in Frank Perlin, Concepts of Order and Comparison, with a
diversion on counter-ideologies and corporate institutions in late pre-colonial India, in
T.J. Byres and H. Mukhia, eds., Feudalism and non-European societies, London, 1985,
pp. 87-165; also his article Money-Use in late pre-colonial India and the international trade
in currency media, in J.F. Richards, ed., The Imperial Monetary System of Mughal India,
Delhi, 1987, pp. 232-373, which implicitly provides a thorough-going critique of the very idea
of an imperial monetary system, as set out by Richards! I should stress once more that the
replacement of these system-oriented approaches with other essentialist constructs like fitna
(see note 2 supra
) is to trade King Log for King Stork.
62
For some glimpses of the possibilities in this direction, see Farooqi, Mughal-Ottoman
Relations, cited in note 31 supra, also Riazul Islam, ed., Documents on Indo-Persian relations,
passim.
321
late sixteenth century, the question of region and empire, set out by
Chetan Singh in his recent monograph on Punjab in the seventeenth
century, merits exploration. To what extent did Mughal conquest fundamentally affect the institutions and political culture of different regions in
the sub-continent? Did the notion of the region itself change as a result of
the process of incorporation into the empire? These questions can, however,
only be addressed if we see the Mughal empire not as a finished product in
1600 (or at the death of Akbar), but as a state that was still evolving, and
struggling to come to grips with a variety of local and regional institutional
regimes. At the same time, to approach these issues means far more than
producing parochial local histories, or paraphrasing the apocryphal
chronicles of particular zaminddr families. It means writing histories that
share neither the structural presuppositions of Bernier, nor a simplistic
vision of the Mughal Juggernaut, the medieval road-roller that reduced the
sub-continent into an institutional flatland.